In case you're new to the site and/or the podcast, Oscar Talk is a weekly kudocast, your one-stop awards chat shop between yours truly and Anne Thompson of Thompson on Hollywood. The podcast is weekly, every Friday throughout the season, charting the ups and downs of contenders along the way. Plenty of things change en route to Oscar's stage and we're here to address it all as it unfolds.

Guess what won some more awards? Would you believe "Argo?" The film took top honors at the BAFTA Awards last weekend. We discuss the show's winners and potential Oscar impact, especially as it regards hopefuls like Quentin Tarantino and Emmanuelle Riva.

Another award "Argo" picked up was the USC Scripter prize. Is a WGA Award next? We preview the weekend's upcoming screenplay competition and forecast the screenplay Oscar races as well.

Last week we covered animated features and shorts. This week we dive in on documentaries. We mull over the feature and short subject competitions, two strong categories.

Speaking of shorts, the last category we need to cover finally gets its day: Best Live Action Short. Will emotion win out over production value?

And finally, reader questions. We address queries about our initial dismissal of Christoph Waltz's Oscar chances and how the Academy reacts to digital production design.

Have a listen to the new podcast below. If the file cuts off for you at any time, try the back-up download link at the bottom of this post. You to subscribe to Oscar Talk via iTunes here. And as always, if you have a question you'd like us to address on a future podcast, send it to OscarTalk@HitFix.com.

Kristopher Tapley has covered the film awards landscape for over a decade. He founded In Contention in 2005. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, The Times of London and Variety. He begs you not to take any of this too seriously.

Kris' understanding of the Oscar race has been so brilliant this year. I love that he asked where this perception of Lincoln's frontrunner status came from. We really got carried away with its 12 nomination haul. It doesn't mean it was ever #1.

Historically speaking, the more nominations you get, the more likely it is that you win Best Picture. And in the instances where the most nominated film didn't win, it almost always lost to the 2nd most nominated film - The Artist (10) over Hugo (11) , Slumdog (10) over Benjamin Button (13), Beautiful Mind (8) over Fellowship (13). For a film that's the 5th most nominated to win (without a BD nom no less) over the most nominated film is kinda statistically impossible (according to AMPAS).

So in the off chance something random happens next Sunday and Lincoln does win, except all the pundits to point to history, some more smugly than others.

I could've done without your imagery in the first sentence, Loyal. But you're right; all of this whole “nominations count doesn’t matter” talk is silly. It doesn’t matter when the difference is between 10 and 11, or 11 and 12, or even 10 and 13. But we’re talking here about the difference between 7 and 12. As you point out, four other films have more nominations than Argo, which has barely half the nominations of the leader!

“But what other nominations could it have gotten?” Good question. Maybe Actor, maybe Cinematography, maybe Production Design. Longshots? Of course; but no more so than Benh Zeitlin or Jacki Weaver, or “Flight” for screenplay.

Don’t get me wrong; the general logic certainly points to “Argo” winning. But nomination count is certainly one thing against it, and in favor of "Lincoln".

Im sorry, but Lincoln received amazing reviews, some of the best of the year. Its about one of the most important presidents in the history of America. It also has Spielberg, DDL, Field, TLJ, a huge and wonderful cast. Fantastic techs. Amazing box office. Great buzz from November thru the last few weeks. Enjoyed by every guild. Most nommed at BFCA, GG, BAFTA, and the Oscars. And to say that Benjamin Button had 12 noms, too ... That film also came across cooler with some negative buzz attached and only received reviews in the 70s on rottentomatoes and metacritic; unlike Lincoln's high 80s and low 90s.

So for all those reasons, I do think that Lincoln had frontrunner status for most of this season, including - certainly - the morning of the The Oscar noms.

Lincoln is such a prestige film. It's important, it's 150 yr anniversary, it's Spielberg, Kushner, and DDL, it's everything on paper. Up on the screen, it's was a little flat. It might have been too smart.

Anna Karenina should get Production Design (ugh, let's just call it Art Direction). There was just so many different ideas and sets and how it flowed from one to another.

Jennifer didn't look shocked/angered to me when she lost the BAFTA, nor did she make a face. David did, for sure. I do think people are being unnecessarily snobbish to her in the Oscarologist World for no really good reason.

Yeah it was mainly Russell. I didn't think Lawrence give much of a reaction (though she was oddly stone-faced compared to Mirren). In any case, I haven't been snobbish to her. I've made my feelings known on the performance but I've been on her side since "The Burning Plain."

Yes. It's clear what you're getting at. It's a hard thing sometimes to separate your opinion on a movie or a piece of work from the real dynamics happening in an awards race. I'm sure to many it seems obvious Kushner would win. I'd like to believe Kushner will win actually. But there is no evidence it will. I'm predicting Argo will win because the trajectory of the season so far points that direction.

Until recently I thought that a Kushner win for screenplay was one of the locks of the night. My reasoning was that it was such a weighty, well written, wordy script that it was in a similar position to Sorkin's The Social Network screenplay. Sure, the movie itself could lose to the popular choice, but the Academy would recognize the better writing. It's looking now like it will be one of Argo's three wins on the night.

SLP shouldn't even be in the equation. I was shocked by its BAFTA win.

Wow, that was a shitty thing for Anne Thompson to say regarding Jennifer Lawrence. Lawrence DID NOT look horrified/angry at all. Look it up...the whole reaction shot is on YOUTUBE. Lawrence looks mildly disappointed at best which is understandable. Lawrence has been praised by Thompson for her performance since September...and now Thompson is supporting the "movement to deprive Lawrence of an Oscar"....accusing Lawrence of giving a reaction that she clearly did not give?. Thompson is a phoney.

Well, I think you've gone a little overboard. That being said, I didn't see what was the difference between Lawrence and say, Chastain's reaction who also looked upset. Even Russell looked more shocked than outraged or disgusted, I mean I certainly didn't think Lawrence was losing after he won Screenplay. I think Russell's past makes him an easy target, though I suppose it's hard to give him the benefit of the doubt in that type of situation. I didn't like his reaction, but it was more funny than offensive. Some just like to blow things out of proportions.

Yes, perhaps I was a little harsh (with regards to the "phoney" remark and I apologize) but, c'mon....Anne Thompson's comment was unfair as well as untrue. I also agree with you regarding Chastain's reaction, what's the difference?..both looked mildly disappointed and that is understandable. It was wrong of Thompson to single Lawrence out when Chastain gave the same reaction. I think it's absurd for Thompson to assume that a look of mild disappointment somehow translates into a disrespect for the craft. I would think that being professional on set, not being difficult, proving yourself a hard worker and being truly great at what you do despite very little in the way of training,that's what matters. It speaks volumes in terms of respect for the craft. It's the reputation Jennifer Lawrence has based on reports from directors, castmates, etc.,. and there has never been anything written or stated to the contrary. Anyway, if Thompson is going to talk about reactions at the BAFTAS, well, be fair and include Chastain as well. Honestly, that's about all I'd have to say about the subject: there wasn't a nasty look from Lawrence just disappointment...the same look Chastain gave and neither was a big deal but, if you are going to bring it up at all, mention Chastain as well.

But about the doc shorts, Open Heart is definitely lacking the gravitas of Saving Face. And though I haven't seen Smile Pinki, I gather from the ceremony that year that it had a lot more heart (no pun intended) than Open Heart.

My personal favorite was Mondays at Racine, which I thought was the most thorough and really took you through the character's journey, thereby earning your sympathy, rather than plopping you down in it and expecting you to care (like Inocente did, with her saying that she was homeless in the opening minute). I did think that Inocente was the most beautifully shot though. And, of course, it's about art which might give it a leg up with the Academy.

I too expect one of those to win.

And lastly, re: Kings Point, while it was cold in the end, the opening was extremely warm with a number of the ladies (Gertie comes to mind) being absolutely hilarious. That's why I think the coldness at the end is all the more powerful: they've really buttered you up before then.

Kris (or anybody out there with knowledge),Do you know if voters can alter their online ballot before the Tuesday deadline? Or is it a one time process where their selections are locked in after they submit.

Unfortunately, I think the controversy surrounding "Zero Dark Thirty" has overwhelmed the movie so much that it will undoubtedly be the headline of the WGA whether it wins or loses. If it wins, people will be saying that the writers are making a stand and sticking up for the movie; if it loses, people will blame the controversy. So sadly, I think Boal is in a lose-lose situation there, because most people seem to be past the point of being able to interpret any praise for that movie outside the lens of its controversy.

When it comes to the screenplay categories, though, it seems like the Academy voters have gone their own way more often than in the other major categories. Look at "Precious" or "The Pianist," for example. As I recall, neither of them won any precursor prizes for their screenplays. So I'm not reading too much into Quentin Tarantino's Golden Globe and BAFTA wins. Like most other categories this year, I think both screenplay awards are up for grabs. Adapted Screenplay is a 3-way race to me, and honestly, the only movie I'm counting out in Original Screenplay is "Flight." Yes, I do think "Moonrise Kingdom" has a shot. A very slight one, but a shot nonetheless.

I went to imdb.com to check to last Oscar nominee I haven't seen and now I'm really depressed and embarassed. Since I started with the Oscars I've missed 28 titles that got nominated for something: The Tempest: Hereafter; The Way Back; Another Year; The Lovely Bones; Paris 36; Norbit; August Rush; Half Nelson; Venus; Transamerica; Vera Drake; Pieces of April; The Time Machine; Sexy Beast; Before Night Falls; Straight Story; Sweet and Lowdown; Tumbleweeds; Little Voice; Beloved; Quest for Camelot; The Apostle; Ulee's Gold; Afterglow; Donnie Brasco and Kundun.

@Andrea: Nope...the reactions were pretty much the same. My point is, Thompson used the words "shocked and horrified" (LOL!) as an explanation for why Lawrence may not win the Oscar and ...c'mon, Lawrence did not look "shocked or horrified" it's untrue and unfair. Look, I think all the performances are wonderful and all are deserving. I just thought Thompson's comment (and it's the second week in a row that she has targeted Lawrence)was silly.